Binge drinking and violence in the transition to adulthood.

We analyzed data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) to test the hypothesis that binge drinking, rather than frequency of any drinking, would predict violent behavior in the transition from adolescence to adulthood (TAA). In conservative models, accounting for a host of factors relevant to the TAA, we find that binge drinking, but not frequency of drinking, is associated with violent behavior. The models included a control for nonviolent offending, conforming to studies of the "differential etiology of violence" thesis. In addition, we tested whether this association fell away among participants over the age of 21 and found that underage status did not mediate the association between binge drinking and violent behavior.

National observational study to evaluate the "cleanyourhands" campaign (NOSEC): a questionnaire based study of national implementation.

INTRODUCTION: The number of national hand-hygiene campaigns has increased recently, following the World Health Organisation's (WHO) "Save Lives: clean your hands" initiative (2009), which offers hospitals a multi-component hand-hygiene intervention. The number of campaigns to be evaluated remains small. Most evaluations focus on consumption of alcohol hand rub (AHR). We are not aware of any evaluation reporting implementation of all campaign components. In a previously published report, we evaluated the effects of the English and Welsh cleanyourhands campaign (2004-8) on procurement of AHR and soap, and on selected healthcare associated infections. We now report on the implementation of each individual campaign component: provision of bedside AHR, ward posters, patient empowerment materials, audit and feedback, and guidance to secure institutional engagement. SETTING: all 189 acute National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England and Wales (December 2005-June 2008). Six postal questionnaires (five voluntary, one mandatory) were distributed to infection control teams six-monthly from 6 to 36 months post roll-out. Selection and attrition bias were measured. RESULTS: Response rates fell from 134 (71 %) at 6 months to 82 (44 %) at 30 months, rising to 167 (90 %) for the final mandatory one (36 months). There was no evidence of attrition or selection bias. Hospitals reported widespread early implementation of bedside AHR and posters and a gradual rise in audit. At 36 months, 90 % of respondents reported the campaign to be a top hospital priority, with implementation of AHR, posters and audit reported by 96 %, 97 % and 91 % respectively. Patient empowerment was less successful. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that all campaign components, apart from patient empowerment, were widely implemented and sustained. It supports previous work suggesting that adequate piloting, strong governmental support, refreshment of campaigns, and sufficient time to engage institutions help secure sustained implementation of a campaign's key components. The results should encourage countries wishing to launch coordinated national campaigns for hospitals to participate in the WHO's "Save Lives" initiative, which offers hospitals a similar multi-component intervention.

Application of a theoretical framework for behavior change to hospital workers' real-time explanations for noncompliance with hand hygiene guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient use of behavioral theory to understand health care workers' (HCWs) hand hygiene compliance may result in suboptimal design of hand hygiene interventions and limit effectiveness. Previous studies examined HCWs' intended, rather than directly observed, compliance and/or focused on just 1 behavioral model. This study examined HCWs' explanations of noncompliance in "real time" (immediately after observation), using a behavioral theory framework, to inform future intervention design. METHODS: HCWs were directly observed and asked to explain episodes of noncompliance in "real-time." Explanations were recorded, coded into 12 behavioral domains, using the Theory Domains Framework, and subdivided into themes. RESULTS: Over two-thirds of 207 recorded explanations were explained by 2 domains. These were "Memory/Attention/Decision Making" (87, 44%), subdivided into 3 themes (memory, loss of concentration, and distraction by interruptions), and "Knowledge" (55, 26%), with 2 themes relating to specific hand hygiene indications. No other domain accounted for more than 18 (9%) explanations. CONCLUSION: An explanation of HCW's "real-time" explanations for noncompliance identified "Memory/Attention/Decision Making" and "Knowledge" as the 2 behavioral domains commonly linked to noncompliance. This suggests that hand hygiene interventions should target both automatic associative learning processes and conscious decision making, in addition to ensuring good knowledge. A theoretical framework to investigate HCW's "real-time" explanations of noncompliance provides a coherent way to design hand hygiene interventions.

The national one week prevalence audit of universal meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) admission screening 2012.

INTRODUCTION: The English Department of Health introduced universal MRSA screening of admissions to English hospitals in 2010. It commissioned a national audit to review implementation, impact on patient management, admission prevalence and extra yield of MRSA identified compared to "high-risk" specialty or "checklist-activated" screening (CLAS) of patients with MRSA risk factors. METHODS: National audit May 2011. Questionnaires to infection control teams in all English NHS acute trusts, requesting number patients admitted and screened, new or previously known MRSA; MRSA point prevalence; screening and isolation policies; individual risk factors and patient management for all new MRSA patients and random sample of negatives. RESULTS: 144/167 (86.2%) trusts responded. Individual patient data for 760 new MRSA patients and 951 negatives. 61% of emergency admissions (median 67.3%), 81% (median 59.4%) electives and 47% (median 41.4%) day-cases were screened. MRSA admission prevalence: 1% (median 0.9%) emergencies, 0.6% (median 0.4%) electives, 0.4% (median 0%) day-cases. Approximately 50% all MRSA identified was new. Inpatient MRSA point prevalence: 3.3% (median 2.9%). 104 (77%) trusts pre-emptively isolated patients with previous MRSA, 63 (35%) pre-emptively isolated admissions to "high-risk" specialties; 7 (5%) used PCR routinely. Mean time to MRSA positive result: 2.87 days (±1.33); 37% (219/596) newly identified MRSA patients discharged before result available; 55% remainder (205/376) isolated post-result. In an average trust, CLAS would reduce screening by 50%, identifying 81% of all MRSA. "High risk" specialty screening would reduce screening by 89%, identifying 9% of MRSA. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of universal screening was poor. Admission prevalence (new cases) was low. CLAS reduced screening effort for minor decreases in identification, but implementation may prove difficult. Cost effectiveness of this and other policies, awaits evaluation by transmission dynamic economic modelling, using data from this audit. Until then trusts should seek to improve implementation of current policy and use of isolation facilities.

The Feedback Intervention Trial (FIT)--improving hand-hygiene compliance in UK healthcare workers: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Achieving a sustained improvement in hand-hygiene compliance is the WHO's first global patient safety challenge. There is no RCT evidence showing how to do this. Systematic reviews suggest feedback is most effective and call for long term well designed RCTs, applying behavioural theory to intervention design to optimise effectiveness. METHODS: Three year stepped wedge cluster RCT of a feedback intervention testing hypothesis that the intervention was more effective than routine practice in 16 English/Welsh Hospitals (16 Intensive Therapy Units [ITU]; 44 Acute Care of the Elderly [ACE] wards) routinely implementing a national cleanyourhands campaign). Intervention-based on Goal & Control theories. Repeating 4 week cycle (20 mins/week) of observation, feedback and personalised action planning, recorded on forms. Computer-generated stepwise entry of all hospitals to intervention. Hospitals aware only of own allocation. PRIMARY OUTCOME: direct blinded hand hygiene compliance (%). RESULTS: All 16 trusts (60 wards) randomised, 33 wards implemented intervention (11 ITU, 22 ACE). Mixed effects regression analysis (all wards) accounting for confounders, temporal trends, ward type and fidelity to intervention (forms/month used). INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS: Estimated odds ratio (OR) for hand hygiene compliance rose post randomisation (1.44; 95% CI 1.18, 1.76;p<0.001) in ITUs but not ACE wards, equivalent to 7-9% absolute increase in compliance. PER-PROTOCOL ANALYSIS FOR IMPLEMENTING WARDS: OR for compliance rose for both ACE (1.67 [1.28-2.22]; p<0.001) & ITUs (2.09 [1.55-2.81]; p<0.001) equating to absolute increases of 10-13% and 13-18% respectively. Fidelity to intervention closely related to compliance on ITUs (OR 1.12 [1.04, 1.20]; p = 0.003 per completed form) but not ACE wards. CONCLUSION: Despite difficulties in implementation, intention-to-treat, per-protocol and fidelity to intervention, analyses showed an intervention coupling feedback to personalised action planning produced moderate but significant sustained improvements in hand-hygiene compliance, in wards implementing a national hand-hygiene campaign. Further implementation studies are needed to maximise the intervention's effect in different settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN65246961.

"The dirty hand in the latex glove": a study of hand hygiene compliance when gloves are worn.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Wearing of gloves reduces transmission of organisms by healthcare workers' hands but is not a substitute for hand hygiene. Results of previous studies have varied as to whether hand hygiene is worse when gloves are worn. Most studies have been small and used nonstandardized assessments of glove use and hand hygiene. We sought to observe whether gloves were worn when appropriate and whether hand hygiene compliance differed when gloves were worn. DESIGN: Observational study. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Healthcare workers in 56 medical or care of the elderly wards and intensive care units in 15 hospitals across England and Wales. METHODS: We observed hand hygiene and glove usage (7,578 moments for hand hygiene) during 249 one-hour sessions. Observers also recorded whether gloves were or were not worn for individual contacts. RESULTS: Gloves were used in 1,983 (26.2%) of the 7,578 moments for hand hygiene and in 551 (16.7%) of 3,292 low-risk contacts; gloves were not used in 141 (21.1%) of 669 high-risk contacts. The rate of hand hygiene compliance with glove use was 41.4% (415 of 1,002 moments), and the rate without glove use was 50.0% (1,344 of 2,686 moments). After adjusting for ward, healthcare worker type, contact risk level, and whether the hand hygiene opportunity occurred before or after a patient contact, glove use was strongly associated with lower levels of hand hygiene (adjusted odds ratio, 0.65 [95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.79]; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The rate of glove usage is lower than previously reported. Gloves are often worn when not indicated and vice versa. The rate of compliance with hand hygiene was significantly lower when gloves were worn. Hand hygiene campaigns should consider placing greater emphasis on the World Health Organization indications for gloving and associated hand hygiene. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Research Register N0256159318.

Technical note: Assessment of blinding of hand hygiene observers in randomized controlled trials of hand hygiene interventions.

Trials evaluating interventions to improve health care workers' hand hygiene compliance use directly observed compliance as a primary outcome measure. Observers should be blinded to the intervention and the effectiveness of blinding assessed to prevent systematic bias. The literature has not addressed this issue, and this study describes a robust and pragmatic method for assessing the adequacy of blinding in hand hygiene intervention trials.

Human ecology, crime, and crime control: linking individual behavior and aggregate crime.

The paper extends previous research published by Cohen, Machalek, Vila, and others on the evolutionary-ecological paradigm for understanding criminal behavior. After reviewing literature related to human ecology and crime, the paper focuses on elements relevant to human ecology-biology, development, and ecological factors--and their role in criminal behavior. Major emphasis is placed on the linkages between individual factors and macro-level crime using chronic offending as a case in point. The principles of evolutionary ecology then are used to discuss counterstrategies to crime, and the prospects for protection/avoidance, deterrent, and nurturant strategies in light of evidence on chronic offending.